Page:EB1911 - Volume 20.djvu/965

 a college, which continue to hold foremost rank among the similar academies since established in western India. But Mr Patel's most remarkable public service was performed in connexion with the Parsee Law Association, of which he was president. Since their exodus from Persia the domestic affairs of the Parsees had been in a very unsettled state. Matrimonial obligations and the rights of succession in cases of intestacy had fallen into hopeless confusion, and the adjudication of disputes in relation thereto was effected by certain elders of the community, who had neither the knowledge and help of fixed principles to guide their judgments, nor any authority to enforce their decisions. The case of Ardesir Cursetjee v. Peeroxebai, which came up on appeal before the privy council in England, brought to light the strange fact that even the supreme court of Bomb.ny had no jurisdiction over matrimonial and ecclesiastical disputes among Parsees. This state of lawlessness was recognized by that community as intolerable, and the agitation which ensued thereupon led to the appointment of a commission, of which the distinguished jurist, Sir Joseph Arnould, was the president and Framjee Patel the chief Parsee member. The Parsee Law Association, under the guidance of Patel and Sorabjee Bengallee, rendered invaluable help to the commission, and their joint efforts resulted in the passing by the government of India of the Parsee Marriage and Divorce Act and the Parsee Intestate Succession Act (15 and 21 of 1865). These acts form the charter of matrimonial and ecclesiastical status for the Parsees. At the time of his death in 1894, at the ripe age of nearly ninety years, Framjee Patel was the most revered and best beloved of the distinguished natives of India, having during an eventful public life extending over sixty years worked in co-operation with three generations of the most prominent of his compatriots to better the condition of their country. His family surname refers to the title of patel, that is, “mayor,” of Bombay, conferred on its founder for services rendered to the English in 1692.

PATEN (through the Fr. from Lat. patina or patena, Gr. , a flat dish), the name of the shallow plate or dish used in the celebration of the Eucharist for the consecrated bread or wafer. The paten has from the first been almost always of a circular shape. There is a rare example of a rectangular one, dating from the 7th century, in the Cabinet des Medailles in Paris. The central portion of the paten is sometimes decorated with the engraved head of the Saviour, or commonly with a group of lobes.

PÂTENÔTRE DES NOYERS, JULES (1845–), French diplomatist, was born at Baye (Marne) on the 20th of April 1845. Educated at the Ecole Normale Superieure, he taught for some years in the lycée at Algiers before he joined the diplomatic service in 1871. His most important mission was in 1884, when he was sent as French minister to China to regularize the French dominion in Annam. After arranging at Hue with the king of Annam the condition of the French protectorate, he proceeded to Shanghai to settle with China the difficulties which had arisen over the evacuation of Tongking by the Chinese troops. The negotiation failed, and the French admiral resumed hostilities against China in August. Next year Pâtenôtre signed with Li Hung Chang a treaty of peace at Tien-tsin, by which the French protectorate in Annam and Tongking was recognized, and both parties agreed to remain within their own borders in the future. After serving as minister plenipotentiary in Morocco (1888–1891), M. Pâtenôtre was sent to Washington, where he was raised to the rank of ambassador in 1893. He was ambassador at Madrid from 1897 to 1902.

PATENTS, properly documents conferring some privilege, right, &c., short for (q.v.). Patents for inventions, instruments which formerly bore the great seal of the United Kingdom, are now issued at the Patent Office in London under the seal of that office. By their means inventors obtain a monopoly in their inventions for fourteen years, a term which, if insufficient to remunerate the inventor, can be extended.

This monopoly is founded on exactly the same principle as the copyright enjoyed by authors and artists. There are persons who argue that no such privilege should be permitted; there are others who think that the most trifling exertions of the inventive faculties should be protected. The right course clearly lies between these extremes. To grant a very long term of exclusive possession might be detrimental to the public, since it would tend to stop the progress of improvement. A limited property must therefore be allowed—large enough to give the inventor an opportunity of reaping a fair reward, but not barring the way for an unreasonable period. And, when this compromise has been decided on, it will be seen how difficult it may be to determine beforehand what is the real merit of an invention, and apportion the time to that merit. Hence it has been found necessary to allot one fixed period for all kinds of inventions falling within the purview of the patent laws.

United Kingdom.–Formerly the reigning prince considered himself entitled, as part of his prerogative, to grant privileges of the nature of monopolies to any one who had gained his favour. These grants became so numerous that they were oppressive and unjust to various classes of the commonwealth; and hence, in the reign of James I., a statute was wrung from that king which declared all monopolies that were grievous and inconvenient to the subjects of the realm to be void. (See ; .) There was, however, a special exception from this enactment of all letters patent and grants of privilege of the “sole working or making of any manner of new manufacture within the realm to the true and first inventor of such manufacture, which others at the time of making such letters patent and grants should not use, so they be not contrary to law, nor mischievous to the state by raising of the prices of commodities at home or hurt of trade or generally inconvenient.” Upon these words hangs the whole law of letters patent for inventions. Many statutes were afterwards passed, but these were all repealed by the Patent Act of 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 57), which, besides introducing a new procedure, modified the law in several particulars. Subsequently acts amending the law were passed in 1885, 1886, 1888, 1901, 1902 and 1907. These acts, with the exception of certain sections of the act of 1883, were repealed by a consolidating act, the Patents and Designs Act 1907, which also introduced new provisions into English patent law. Where the law is not expressly laid down by act of parliament, it has to be gathered from the numerous decisions of the courts, for patent law is to no inconsiderable extent “judge-made law.”

The inventions for which patents are obtained are chiefly either vendible articles formed by chemical or mechanical operations, such as cloth, alloys, vulcanized india-rubber, &c., or machinery and apparatus, or processes. It may be remarked here that a scientific principle cannot form the subject of a valid patent unless its application to a practical and useful end and object is shown. An abstract notion, a philosophical idea, may be extremely valuable in the realm of science, but before it is allowed to form a sound basis for a patent the world must be shown how to apply it so as to gain therefrom some immediate material advantage. With regard to processes, the language of the statute of James has been strained to bring them within the words “any manner of new manufacture,” and judges on the bench have admitted that the exposition of the act has gone much beyond the letter. However, it is undoubted law that a process is patentable; and patents are accordingly obtained for processes every day.

The principal classes of patentable inventions seem to be these: (1) new contrivances applied to new ends, (2) new contrivances applied to old ends, (3) new combinations of old parts, whether relating to material objects or processes, (4) new methods of applying a well-known object.

With regard to a patent for the new application of a well known object it may be remarked that there must be some display of ingenuity, some amount of invention, in making the application, otherwise the patent will be invalid on the ground that the subject-matter is destitute of novelty. For example, a fish plate, used before the introduction of railways to connect